Advice to the Public Dick

This is the result of dogma combined with the necessity to make sure of public funding for black hole theory – the “exigency of the machine” in the words of the poet R. S. Thomas. It has nothing to do with Baconian science. We know from scientometrics that a large percentage of the younger generation of physicists no longer accepts the old dogma. As just shown in chapter two of “ECE2: The Second Paradigm Shift”, the second Bianchi identity on which the old Einstein dogma rests directly, is incorrect due to torsion. This was first pointed out in UFT88. It follows that none of the predictions of the Einstein field equation can be meaningful. I don’t think that the “Nature” editors have the intellectual honesty or competence to argue with the eminent Australian scholar and AIAS Fellow Stephen Crothers. If UFT88 were submitted to “Nature” it would be used as blotting paper. It would be like sending Clause Four of the Labour Manifesto to the tory prime minister. We have outflanked all of that censorship.”

Crothers the Public Dick (formerly Sam Spade, but that was unfair to Spade) reminds us of Stefan Marinov. He was a loony who, apparently, held a real doctorate and was also virulently anti-Einstein … although his ‘bag’ was to have supposed experimental evidence against relativity rather than just offering amateurish mathematics. He also had a long feud with Nature magazine, which sometimes published his letters. He found other ways of getting his ‘work’ into the magazine: one Christmas he sent it an electromagnetic puzzle in the form of a diagram. It was an old puzzle, and one which is a conundrum only to electrical engineers, but Nature staff failed to recognize it as such; thus showing themselves up (and not for the first time). His other way of getting into Nature was to insert his ‘work’ as a paid advertisement. But Nature cheated him here because it was put among the Roman-numeral pages of the magazine: these are usually torn off when libraries bind the volumes. He pulled the same stunt with New Scientist but that magazine, which has always been crackpot-friendly, put Marinov’s drivel where it would not be disturbed and thus pollutes its bound volumes for ever. Strangely enough, we agree with Ron’s opinion of Nature but for slightly different reasons. Nature, far from being the “World’s Leading Scientific Journal”, as journalists routinely call it (because it is written largely for the non-specialist and they can just about understand it), is not a journal at all; it is a science magazine. It grew out of an early magazine which was more like Fortean Times than like a serious scientific source. It has always had the relentless money-making attitude of a tabloid newspaper and will do anything to attract public attention: who can ever forget how soft it was on Uri Geller when he first appeared (the then-editor was generally soft on the paranormal). What happened to Marinov? He did the decent thing, an example which should be followed by all such no-hope cranks, and jumped to his death from the fire-escape of the library at his local university. So, all of you crackpots out there, save up for a paid advert., and make sure that you have a valid library card.